This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: legislating morality

All laws legislate morality.

The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
-GK Chesterton

Re: legislating morality

Originally Posted by johndylan1

What if I do not care about a civil society? What if there is a scarce commodity and I find it in my self interest to have it. If morality did not guide my way via law and punishment would I not simply take it?

The fact that some people do not care about civil society does not mean the laws that promote a civil society are unjustified on a basis that has nothing to do with morality.

Re: legislating morality

Originally Posted by mpg

That's the point of this website?

Depending on the issue, core values are enough explanation. If someone was against capital punishment based on principle, would they need to cite crime statistics to support their opposition? If they said 'two wrongs don't make a right', is that the same as saying nothing at all? Would their opposition to the death penalty be "unacceptable" or "invalid"?

The purpose of debate is to support your position, and if you badger other people for answers, then attempt the same courtesy or recognize that courteously, that you only have opinion and nothing else.

And for your example, it depends on the opinion your give. If you are against the DP for religious reasons, you can cite the passage in the Bible about killing. OTOH, that is so widely known that you would not need the citation. However if you based your position on the DP reducing crime...then you'd need to show those statistics. If you based it on how it affected one "person's" rights and not someone else's, you'd have to show how the 2nd person was actually not harmed by the protection of the first's, instead of giving cryptic little one-liners that do not support the position.

Originally Posted by Bucky

I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.

Originally Posted by applejuicefool

A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

Re: legislating morality

and if you badger other people for answers, then attempt the same courtesy or recognize that courteously, that you only have opinion and nothing else.

obviously

Originally Posted by Lursa

And for your example, it depends on the opinion your give. If you are against the DP for religious reasons, you can cite the passage in the Bible about killing. OTOH, that is so widely known that you would not need the citation. However if you based your position on the DP reducing crime...then you'd need to show those statistics. If you based it on how it affected one "person's" rights and not someone else's, you'd have to show how the 2nd person was actually not harmed by the protection of the first's, instead of giving cryptic little one-liners that do not support the position.

What if I rely completely on my core values and my only reason for opposing the death penalty is 'two wrongs don't make a right'?

Re: legislating morality

What if I rely completely on my core values and my only reason for opposing the death penalty is 'two wrongs don't make a right'?

Not that obviously, since I described a common posting behavior of your own.

That's a fairly common position so perhaps no one would ask you to support it further. Dealing with 2 *people* who have *equal* rights. Your stated position is that the court system does not have the right to take the right to life from a "person" that took the right to life from another "person" because they have "equal" rights.

Originally Posted by Bucky

I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.

Originally Posted by applejuicefool

A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

Re: legislating morality

The fact that some people do not care about civil society does not mean the laws that promote a civil society are unjustified on a basis that has nothing to do with morality.

Of course it does, to desire a civil society is a moral base. Why do you think tribal societies have killed without pause? Their moral imperative is to gather scarce resources such as territory, workers, and food. To them it is moral to protect their own tribe. Our society's moral imperative is to respect individual rights and property. There is no concept of civil society apart from morality.

"It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy." Jean Calvin

Re: legislating morality

Originally Posted by Lursa

Not that obviously, since I described a common posting behavior of your own.

if you say so

Originally Posted by Lursa

That's a fairly common position so perhaps no one would ask you to support it further. Dealing with 2 *people* who have *equal* rights. Your stated position is that the court system does not have the right to take the right to life from a "person" that took the right to life from another "person" because they have "equal" rights.

If it's OK for the death penalty, why isn't it OK for other social issues such as abortion?

Re: legislating morality

Originally Posted by mpg

if you say so

If it's OK for the death penalty, why isn't it OK for other social issues such as abortion?

I do say so, and can post many examples. Would you like me to?

I was expanding on your example of a DP position. Re: abortion, that only applies to 'persons.' If you want to discuss that subject, maybe you could return to the thread where you avoided addressing that instead of taking this one off-topic?

Originally Posted by Bucky

I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.

Originally Posted by applejuicefool

A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

Re: legislating morality

Originally Posted by Lursa

I do say so, and can post many examples. Would you like me to?

I was expanding on your example of a DP position. Re: abortion, that only applies to 'persons.' If you want to discuss that subject, maybe you could return to the thread where you avoided addressing that instead of taking this one off-topic?

Re: legislating morality

Originally Posted by mpg

off topic? ____ing hilarious

Ha you're right....I thought I was in a death penalty thread I'm also commenting in, after you used the dp example.

Feel free to tell me about the morality of according a fetus rights that supersede those of the mother. And how exactly that would be 'workable' in society...you know without invading her personal and medical records? Having the state be responsible for the fetus's wellbeing in uterero if it's deemed she's 'abusing it,' etc.

Without little trite phrases of avoidance.

Originally Posted by Bucky

I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.

Originally Posted by applejuicefool

A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.